Note: Caught has received MANY complaints
over a long period of time regarding the treatment program for sex
offenders at the ACI and Peter Loss who is the chief counselor and
program head. The overwhelming majority of these complaints
expressed great fear of retaliation for speaking out.
Everything on this page is asserted by inmates that had personal
experience with Peter Loss and the sex offender treatment
program. The names have been withheld as is Caught's practice
regarding all complaints coming from within the ACI.Caught has received documentation from inmates showing disciplinary reports that classify this page as 'contraband' if it is in the possession of inmates.

Quotes made by Peter Loss to inmates getting counseling:

"I am your God."

"You people are low lifes."

"You people can never change."

If it was up to me, I would lock you up and throw away the key."

I am trying to get the power to civilly commit you if I see fit."

Peter Loss is also seen by inmates in the media and speaking to Corrections Administration about getting laws passed against sex offenders.

Peter Loss is also reportedly dogmatic against religion as a source of support and believes his methods superior to 12 step programs.

Is Peter Loss a counselor for sex offenders or an extension of the
Attorney General's Office?

Complaint One

Caught! has received a complaint about Mr. Peter Loss who runs a
sex offender treatment program at the ACI. The complaint
asserts the ACI is not following RI law. The complaint cites
Morris v. Travisono 499 Fed 4192 [77-0283] 5 Prison Sec. 12.
Evidently, this is the case that makes rehabilitation programs
mandatory for all inmates regardless of their classification
status. The complaint asserts Mr. Loss is requiring
all inmates to sign a waiver. It is asserted anyone running
these programs can use and profit from any information obtained
during the operation of these programs. [Book deals
etc.] Caught! has received a copy of the waiver inmates are
asserting they are being required to sign. Caught! is
presently investigating this complaint further and will update the
story as it develops. Troublesome factors regarding this
waiver include but are not limited to the following:

If inmates don't sign this "voluntary" waiver, they can't
participate in the program which is mandated by law.

The form is a complete waiver of all confidentiality,
privileges and privacy. The waiver goes so far as to state,
"If any such rights of confidentiality, privilege or privacy exist
or, subsequent to execution of this waiver, are held to exist by
statute or rule of law, I hereby waive any and all such
rights."

The form mandates the reporting by ACI staff of any occurrence
or potential occurrence of any sexual offense regardless of
how the staff discovers the information.

The form states information of a potential occurrence
includes a professional opinion by ACI staff about the inmate's
capacity for committing a sexual offense.

This involuntary "voluntary" waiver raises the question whether
inmates have lost all 5th Amendment rights against self
incrimination?

Is an inmate unwilling to sign away all rights of
confidentiality, privileges and privacy classified as "not
cooperating with his rehabilitation?"

It appears by this waiver all it takes is one inmate to say
about another, "He or she said they thought of or might think of
doing a sexual offense again" to mandate a report to the
Attorney General, State and local police, DCYF, Department of
Corrections, the Parole Board and anyone else the Sex Offender
Treatment Programs sees fit to notify.

It appears rehabilitation via this program is blocked before
the treatment starts. How can one trust a "treatment" program
when anything said by you or about you can be used
against you?

A copy of this complaint was sent to Mr. Peter Loss, the
Warden and the ACLU on Oct. 20, 1998 requesting a response,
clarification or explanation regarding the above issues.
There was no response from anyone at the ACI. The ACLU did
respond acknowledging the complaint but stated they were unable to
pursue it at this time. It is Caught!'s understanding, this
practice continues at the ACI.

Complaint Two

August 2005 - I am writing to you to express my concerns
regarding the Sex Offender Treatment Program (S.O.T.P.), run by Mr.
Peter Loss, here at Medium 1 Security, in Cranston, R.I. I am an
inmate serving a 15 year sentence. I have been in prison for 6.5
years. I have also been (and still am) in Mr. Loss' program, in
good standing, for over 5 years. I've become increasingly disturbed
by Mr. Loss' practices. My concerns are as follows:

1) I understand that Mr. Loss is not a licensed psychologist but,
he certainly acts in that capacity. It appears that he has
immunity, and no accountability to anyone for his practices. He is
his own authority.

2) He has delegated authority to, and pays, several inmates, called
facilitators and sponsors (who are also sex offenders in the
program with psychological issues), to oversee, evaluate, and work
in a counseling capacity to other inmates in the program. They make
recommendations to Peter, as to whether inmates should receive
"good time", or not. More alarmingly, he also asks for their
judgment about whether or not inmates are ready to safely handle
parole release, and assigns these "sponsors" to gather personal
information from inmates, regarding their families and prospective
addresses, once released. They are very biased toward fellow
inmates (their friends). This is often the mindset of prisoners, in
order to "make it through this" (you scratch my back, I'll scratch
yours philosophy). In fact, two of his current facilitators have
disciplinary records for sexual misconduct, while in the program.
This violates Mr. Loss' own contractual agreement he requires
inmates to sign, before he will allow treatment! They were never
suspended. There is also heavy favoritism in the program by Peter
Loss, to certain inmates.

Basically, with Mr. Loss' permission, some of these unqualified
inmates are running the S.O.T.P. (especially when Peter has gone
home for the day, on weekends, and while on vacation) . These
inmates are taking on the responsibility and discernment for public
safety. This is a very dangerous situation indeed!

3) There is no completion/graduation date, no time limit to this
program, as in most, if not all other states that offer this type
of treatment. Therefore, many sex offenders are being denied
treatment, due to the long waiting list and low turn-over rate.
They are released into society, untreated. This should be of grave
concern to the public. There are inmates who have been in this
S.O.T.P. for 8, 10, 12 years, or more. Some have been paroled, with
Mr. Loss1 recommendation, only to return to prison on a violation
of their parole conditions. They are then let back into the
program, and allowed to continue to "counsel" others (blind leading
the blind?).

4) Mr. Loss does not approve of any private, licensed psychologist
to come into the prison to counsel or evaluate inmates in his
program, for fear of his "methods" being exposed, and to avoid
conflict with differing professional opinions. If you go against
his "rule", he has, and will, suspend people from the program,
without notice. He has had many disputes with prison staff and
colleagues who do not, "see things his way". Upon release, he
insists that parolees continue counseling only with his
"associates", for an undetermined period of time, who charge a
weekly fee.

5) There are about 90 inmates currently active in the S.O.T.P.,
with Mr. Loss acting as the only social worker to try to
accommodate all their needs. Over the years, I have observed this
to be an impossible task for Mr. Loss. He therefore has to delegate
authority to inmates, some of whom have deeper psychological
issues/problems than the people they attempt to provide treatment
to. There are cliques, with a "pack" mentality in the "group
therapy" sessions, for the purpose of tearing-down and demeaning
selected individuals. Personally, I find all this to be detrimental
to my own treatment/recovery and overall mental well-being. Many
others have shared this same sentiment with me. Mr. Loss
often confuses my "issues" and my police report with other inmate's
details concerning their crime(s) and "contributing issues". This
is unfair, but not surprising, considering he is only one person,
struggling to keep track of over 90 cases (as well as over 300
other cases, not in the program). I have made attempts in the past,
to respectfully address my concerns with Mr. Loss, only to be
confronted by him with extreme arrogance, spitefulness and
vindictive behavior.

6) Mr. Loss has openly admitted to storing boxes of inmate police
reports in the trunk of his car. Forbid that his car should be
stolen, or in an accident and this sensitive personal information
about innocent family members/victims (names, addresses, etc.) get
into the wrong hands!

7) I have seen documentation that states Mr. Loss was involved in a
lawsuit in the State of Connecticut (New London or New Haven?),
while working as a counselor some years ago (Late 1980's?),
alleging misconduct. This does not surprise me, as I observe his
conduct here, and the questionable relationships he has with select
(pet) inmates. When he is asked about these concerns (in group, or
private setting), he becomes defensive and responds ambiguously,
changing the subject quickly. People have learned not to question
him about this or other discrepancies, as reprisals have been the
result.

8) As part of our "recovery", Mr. Loss forces us to watch movies
depicting child rape scenes, in a "video discussion group". I
refused to partake in viewing such material, under the threat of
penalty, as are others.

9) From my observations over the past five plus years in the
S.O.T.P., I believe Mr. Loss to be more concerned with
self-glorification, self-preservation, and his own job security,
than in actually helping people to recover from their maladies and
prevent recidivism.
I am a first time, one incident, one victim, offender, who is an
alcoholic and was extremely intoxicated the night of my crime, and
I will regret my actions the rest of my life. My full intention and
wish, is to never re-offend. I do not believe Mr. Loss' program to
be conducive to my endeavor. In fact, others have told me that his
"methods" have proven to be a hinderance to their
recovery/treatment. I am currently pursuing private counseling by a
licensed psychologist at my own expense to help me in my treatment.
I am sure to be suspended from the program for this (see item #4
above).

Complaint Three

Mr. Loss appoints sex offender inmates as facilitators.
These facilitators are being paid by the Department of Corrections
to "counsel" other sex offenders and are in charge of assessing
their treatment progress. Mr. Loss requires that
participants waive all confidentiality rights to enable his
facilitators to counsel you. If you refuse, you are
removed from the program and receive no treatment. [Note:
Many of the inmates lawyers counsel them to NOT sign the waiver of
all confidentiality because it equates to a negation of the 5th
amendment. Sex offender treatment programs in some states
have run into trouble for this very reason.] Facilitators
report their assessments to Mr. Loss, who then decides based on
facilitators reports:

whether or not the inmates in the program shall receive 3 days a
month "good time credits."

whether someone should remain in treatment and/or

if they should receive good or bad recommendations for Parole
Eligibility. Caught has received copies of several
refusals for parole by the parole board which cited lack of
participation in the sex offender treatment program in their
decision.

The potential for abuses and injustice given this set up are
enormous when the realities of prison life are considered.
ACI Director AT Wall has stated that no inmate has a constitutional
right to treatment in the sex offender treatment program. The
need for sex offender treatment at the ACI is roughly 6 to 7 times
the ACI's capacity to treat. This is apparently due, in
part, to the fact Peter Loss refuses to "graduate" participants as
is common in other states. If your sentence is 20
years, Peter Loss has to treat you for 20 years. This creates
a need to force a rotation of participants via "suspensions" for
any reason - valid or not. Many inmates believe that
money is behind the "no graduation" policy because it keeps the
list long and the classes full resulting in more funding.
Recommendations by the court regarding sex offender treatment are
just that - recommendations which the prison does not have to
follow. Yet, inmates are routinely denied parole for not
getting treatment in the sex offender program.

Rhode Island Parole Board Policy Statement 4-30-2003 - paragraph 11 SEXUAL OFFENSES & CHILD MOLESTATION: An individual found
guilty of a sexual offense will not generally be seriously considered for parole until he/she has successfully taken part in the Sex Offender Treatment Program. The Board will take the recommendation of the Sex Offender Treatment Program into consideration when evaluating an inmate for potential release on parole.

Complaint Four

Caught has received NUMEROUS complaints that inmates are removed
from the sex offender treatment program by Peter Loss for
ridiculous reasons with ridiculous criteria being manufactured as
conditions for their reentry into the program. Causes
of removal could be a rumor, trumped up charges by anyone in
the ACI, Peter Loss' personal likes and dislikes and on and on it
goes. Demands for reconsideration for reentry into the
program consist of meticulous admissions of erroneously reported
wrong doing in minute detail, "responsible and detailed statements"
as to the circumstances of the inmates termination from the
program, intimate and lengthy diaries being kept and submitted,
specific numbers of conversations must take place with Peter Loss'
"facilitators", books must be read and reported on while the
inmates reading and writing skills are ignored as factors for
completion, meticulous goal setting lists with follow-ups and on
and on it goes.

Complaint Five

Caught has received NUMEROUS complaints that Peter Loss has a
variety of ways of threatening inmates if they complain about his
program. There are also complaints that Peter Loss uses a
variety of coercive measures to get inmates leaving the ACI into
fee based counseling with one of Peter Loss' associates.
There are also reports of Peter Loss requesting inmates to give bad
reports about other treatment programs when said programs were
attempting to come into the ACI. It is also believed Peter
Loss' program discriminates against the disabled by lacking the
ability to adequately administer services which is in violation of
RIGL Chapter 87 Sections 42-87-1 thru-- 42-87-5

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

Many times the reason or purpose for events in our life initially escapes us,but I am certain we can find reason and/or purpose in everything that happens!

It takes a short time to learn to exercise power, but a lifetime to learn how to avoid abusing it.

We are no longer a country of laws, we are a country where laws are "creatively interpreted."